[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170810013501.GY20323@X58A-UD3R>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:35:02 +0900
From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, walken@...gle.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
kirill@...temov.name, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, willy@...radead.org,
npiggin@...il.com, kernel-team@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 11/14] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 04:12:58PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> Although lock_page() and its family can cause deadlock, the lock
> correctness validator could not be applied to them until now, becasue
> things like unlock_page() might be called in a different context from
> the acquisition context, which violates lockdep's assumption.
>
> Thanks to CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE, we can now apply the lockdep
> detector to page locks. Applied it.
Is there any reason excluding applying it into PG_locked?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists